1. The question in the appeal is whether Article 182 or 181 of the Indian Limitation Act applies to this application which was an application for restitution of certain property in consequence of the reversal of the original decree. There is no direct decision on this point under the new Civil Procedure Code. The learned pleader for the respondent argues that though it is conceded that the application in question is an application in execution it cannot be said to be an application for execution of the decree and he says that there is authority for the distinction in a case reported in Sultan Sahib Marakayar v. Chidambaram Chettiar (1909) I.L.R. 32 M. 138 at p. 137. But what was decided in that case was that a decree having been already executed and the application being for delivery of possession, there was no question of the execution of the decree. This is a totally different case. It is conceded by the learned pleader that Section 47, C.P. Code does govern an application for restitution under the new Code. He says that it is an application relating to the execution of the decree, but it is not an application for execution of the decree. As we understand the words " an